Hollywoodization is not going to hurt developers that much. Even today, you've got big budget games like Halo 2 or Final Fantasy X coming out, that cost tens of millions of dollars to make. Sure, big budget games will probably always sell more copies, and have better graphics, sound and production values. However, that doesn't stop cheap, innovative, fun games from doing very well.
If Hollywoodization is the future, it won't be such a bad thing. There is room enough in the market for both Sideways and Spiderman 2. Everyone benefits.
Exactly. Plot is an enjoyable part of the game, but it doesn't make a good game. Plot and graphics may keep me playing a mediocre game, just long enough to beat it once, but only gameplay will keep me coming back and playing a game again and again.
The new Xbox has several processors, 512MB RAM, a good graphics card, a hard drive, HD video quality, network connectivity, and is supposedly easily moddable.
Eventually someone is going to get Windows or Linux to run on this and run WELL. When that happens, you'll be able to buy a highly capable PC for $300.
An interesting side effect of this, is that Microsoft has to sell these things at a loss, in order to remain competitive to Sony and Nintendo. Therefore, this might be bad for their profits.
Wouldn't that be bad for MS? After all, they lose money on the console, which they have to make up on the games. If people are just buying the consoles to mod, then they'll have a net loss.
This strategy implies that they're going for a monopoly, rather than profit.
I'd say 10-20 hours. That's long enough to have a good story and a certain amount of complexity, but it's also short enough that you can replay it several times without spending a year on it.
I know that when I play RPGs, I sometimes feel like I'm missing out. I spend 80 hours playing a warrior, which means that I'm missing out on playing a rogue, a priest, or a mage. I don't really want to spend 320 hours playing the same RPG, so I get to play every class. If the game is only 10-20 hours long, then I can spend about 60 hours and I'll get to experience the game from several different perspectives.
Plus, most really long games get repetitive after a while. Once you get about 15 hours into a game, you've discovered 95% of the game mechanics, so you're just going to repeat the same things for another several dozen hours.
I often don't like small games because they have no depth. If you take some of the Popcap games, like Bejeweled, you'll see that there isn't much complexity or strategy to them. Those types of games get very repetitive; your 50th hour will have the same gameplay as your 1st hour.
Once you get into competitive multiplayer games, however, things start to shift. 2-5 minute games can be fun, because you can play so many games in a row that you can try dozens of different strategies and situations. If you're losing, then the game will be over quickly, so you can start afresh. On the other hand, hour long games can be fun, because you can spend large amounts of time plotting methodically against your opponent, only for a game to come down to one huge climactic battle.
Blizzard is excellent at producing genre-defining games. Sure, EQ and UO came out earlier than WoW and invented many of the concepts that are used in modern MMORPGs. However, WoW refined the genre so much that I'd say that it is a genre-defining game, because it will probably define every single MMORPG that comes after it.
I would love to be able to play against Xbox2 players. They can't move well or aim well. They can't even see well unless they have an HDTV. They would just be free kills to up my score.
Wouldn't it be better to have a script constantly write and rewrite 1s and 0s randomly for as long as you have it running, than to just write 0s to it?
It still wouldn't work. Try bunnyhopping with a controller, regardless of the configuration. You have to bend your fingers into extremely irregular configurations, whereas with a PC, all you need to do is press a few keyboard buttons and move your mouse in a rythmic pattern.
Did anyone else think that World of Warcraft wasn't that great?
Maybe I'm not the MMORPG type, but once you got to the mid-game (about lvl20-25+), you've got most of your abilities, so the gameplay mechanics won't change at all for the next several hundred hours that it will take until you reach lvl60 and can do raid instances.
This wouldn't be a big deal (it isn't a big deal in many other games), but the combat system isn't that hard and doesn't have that much depth (compared to the non-multiplayer RPGs that I play).
PvP is based upon your class (and race too, with WotF against Warlocks/Priests). If you face a certain class with a certain class, then you'll get schooled every time, unless there is a massive skill/level disparity (paladins > warriors, druids > warriors, rogues > warlocks, etc). Some items are so cheap (spider belt, the blacksmith trinket that stops fear) that they destroy another class' only way to stop certain classes.
Character development is sparse, even compared to final fantasy games. Here are the only ways to customize your characters:
1.Race
2.Class
3.Items
4.Talents
5.Skills
1. This has little effect, unless you're an undead PvPer.
2. This makes a huge difference, but this is in almost every other RPG.
3. Your items depend almost entirely on the amount of time you spend playing the game, not on how you want to customize your character (unless you go for looks). Most characters have standard choices based upon talents and class. Warlocks go for stamina/intellect, almost always. Warriors go for stamina/strength/armor/DPS. Rogues go for agility/stamina/DPS. Druids go for stamina/intellect/spirit if you're restoration/balance, stamina/agility/strength if you're feral combat. You don't seem to have to make any choices for your equipment. One piece of equipment will always be better than another piece for a certain class/talent combination.
4. Here is the only way to customize your character other than class. It's well done, for the most part, although certain trees/skills are weak (druid feral, warlock demonology).
5. Your choice in skills only seems to determine your cash flow. A miner/skinner will always be richer than a miner/blacksmith, although their equipment will be similiar. The only exception seems to be a PvP engineer. Everything besides engineering stuff can be bought from another character at the AH (yes, there are some soulbound pieces of crafted equipment, but you can get comparable stuff at the AH), so there's no reason to pick anything other than moneymaking professions (except for engineering).
One major thing (that may be endemic of MMORPGs) is that it takes 8 hours for you to level at about lvl30. 8 hours and you get 1 talent point and 1-2 pieces of new equipment. 16 hours gets you 2 talent points, 3-4 pieces of equipment, and upgraded skills. There's very little reward per hour spent playing. Other genres can get away with this (FPS games often have very little character advancement), but they have enough gameplay depth to keep you playing for long periods of time. The one thing that makes an RPG an RPG is character building. If it takes 8 hours to build your character up just slightly, then I'm not playing.
It's got great sound and graphics, a good story line, an excellent UI customization system, tons of Blizzard polish, and high production values.
The gameplay just isn't good enough, in my opinion (I have to say that Halo seems to suffer from the exact same problems, high production values, but mediocre gameplay, but that's OT). It's good for hardcore MMORPG gamers and casual players, but for a more general hardcore player, there are so many better games to play.
By using the tax credits for alternative energy, perhaps? I haven't seen anyone prove that you can get more fuel from growing corn (or whatever biodiesel source you want) than it takes to grow the corn.
I don't even think thermal depolymerization does this (although it does make use of materials that would just be trash, which is why it is useful).
"Their case argues that EA's engineers "do not perform work that is original or creative," that they do not have management responsibilities and are seldom allowed to use their own judgement, according to extracts published by SiliconValley.com."
I'd like to see EA try to prove in court that it does original or creative work.
As hard drives, optical discs, and memory cards keep on getting larger and cheaper, we'll eventually just start using some lossless, 10.2-channel format that is sold on a future CD-type format at Best Buy/Walmart or through iTunes/Napster or through streaming services for your portable music player/computer.
Since all the formats will be equal in quality (at the maximum quality of the human ear), an open standard will eventually emerge. Then everyone will just use that and forget about CDs vs MP3s vs OGG vs iPod vs iRiver vs WMA vs FLAC vs etc.
I heard someone saying that they really aren't very good at FPS at all. They really don't deserve the title "FragDolls" unless they can go into the average CS/UT2003/BF1942/whatever server and rack up the kills.
They have taken an aggressive stance against botting. In fact, fishing was disabled in several areas until they were able to stop the bots.
However, macros are most definately allowed, as they are built into the game. There is a macro button you can click on and create your own macros.
There are a few solutions.
Make sure your maximum fps is set so that there aren't large variations in framerate. I believe the console command is "fps_max" or "max_fps." Set it to something reasonable, like 50.
Try changing the field of view:
sv_cheats 1
fov 90
Make sure your monitor refresh rate is as high as you can get it. Sometimes it will automatically force itself low again. Use the RefreshForce program to fix that (google for it). I like to play at least at 85hz.
Half-Life 2's graphics are excellent but not especially remarkable. The water looks the best I've ever seen in a game. Doom3 has a better engine, visually. However, Doom3 looks worse than Half-Life 2 because Valve appears to have a higher caliber of artists than iD does. Doom3 looks as good or worse than the screenshots. Half Life 2 looks better than its screenshots because screenshots don't give you the awesome physics engine. When you throw a grenade, things fly around realistically, looking amazing. Doom3 has some physics effects, but nothing even nearing the realism of HL2.
If you didn't like FPS games before, but want to try them again, Half Life 2 is the best choice. It's been hailed as the best singleplayer FPS ever released and I completely agree. I wouldn't worry too much about the box art. Both games are among the best ever released visually.
You do have a point. It has a high learning curve, and there are sites (http://www.nslearn.org/) out there to mitigate the problem. A revised version of the manual is almost out, as is a training map. Once you find a good server, the people there can be very helpful.
Regarding goal-oriented tasks in a FPS game, I think I've got a recommendation for you.
If you have the original Half-Life or bought Half-Life 2 Silver Edition, then check out the free mod Natural Selection: http://www.naturalselection.com
Their site is down for today and maybe tomorrow, so here is a description:
It is a battle between Aliens and Marines, similiar to Starcraft (without the Protoss, though). The interesting thing about the gameplay is that you have an entire team based around incredible speed and melee attacks, versus a team based around teamwork and ranged attacks. Of course aliens have a few ranged attacks and require teamwork, but those don't play as large a role as they do for the marines. Aliens can move at about triple the speed of a normal character in a FPS game.
There are two game modes. The first, a simpler one meant for introducing people to the gameplay is called Combat. The marines start with their most basic weapons, and the aliens start as the most basic lifeform (kind of like a class, but lifeforms are incredibly different from each other, not just in statistics or weapon seleciton like classes usually are). As you and your teammates get kills, you get experience points that you can use to buy upgrades. For example, marines can upgrade the amount of armor they have or damage they do, they can get shotguns, grenade launchers, mines, jetpacks, motion tracking (a legal wallhack), automatic resupplies, etc. Aliens can get new abilities, celerity (improves your speed greatly), focus (doubles damage and halves your attack speed), redemption (if you are low on life, automatically teleports you to your base to heal), they can become a lerk (a support class that can fly and dispense clouds of gas to either deflect shots or poison enemies). The object of the game is to destroy a structure at each team's base.
The more involved game mode is called Classic (it was the original game mode). It involves RTS elements. Both teams start far away from each other on the map. The marines start with a command console. One marine can jump in the console and have a RTS-style overhead view of the map. He can drop Resource Towers (these give you resources that will allow you to build more stuff), armories (these will allow you to dispense weapons), siege turrets (these will destroy alien buildings, and even shoot through walls!), drop medpacks or ammo to marines in the field, etc. The aliens all start as skulks (small fast rat-like creatures that can run up walls and bite marines). The aliens can morph into gorges (these will allow you to place recourse nodes, offense chambers (attack turrets), movement chambers (these will restore energy-basically ammo-to all aliens near by and allow you to teleport to the farthest away hive), etc. They can also place hives (these will take a very long time to build, but will double your spawn rate, give you access to more upgrades and more abilities, and improve your armor). You can also change into one of 5 life forms like a fade (hit and run shock trooper that can move at incredible speed and dish out a ton of damage) or an onos (a huge rhinocerous creature that can take tremendous amount of damage, while trashing an enemy base).
It's not Massively Multiplayer (max 32 players, best with about 12-20), and it doesn't have vehicles, but it has everyone other element you wanted. It is very goal oriented, with a diverse set of equipment. It's got heavy fighting, lets you build bases (maybe not as big as fortresses, but it has mines, turrets, electrified buildings, teleportation gates and other goodies). It also has incredibly varied gameplay (you can command like an RTS, play as a marine in a very squad based environment, play as any of the 5 alien lifeforms, each with very different playstyle.
Slashdot Mirror
Hollywoodization is not going to hurt developers that much. Even today, you've got big budget games like Halo 2 or Final Fantasy X coming out, that cost tens of millions of dollars to make. Sure, big budget games will probably always sell more copies, and have better graphics, sound and production values. However, that doesn't stop cheap, innovative, fun games from doing very well.
If Hollywoodization is the future, it won't be such a bad thing. There is room enough in the market for both Sideways and Spiderman 2. Everyone benefits.
Exactly. Plot is an enjoyable part of the game, but it doesn't make a good game. Plot and graphics may keep me playing a mediocre game, just long enough to beat it once, but only gameplay will keep me coming back and playing a game again and again.
The new Xbox has several processors, 512MB RAM, a good graphics card, a hard drive, HD video quality, network connectivity, and is supposedly easily moddable. Eventually someone is going to get Windows or Linux to run on this and run WELL. When that happens, you'll be able to buy a highly capable PC for $300. An interesting side effect of this, is that Microsoft has to sell these things at a loss, in order to remain competitive to Sony and Nintendo. Therefore, this might be bad for their profits.
Wouldn't that be bad for MS? After all, they lose money on the console, which they have to make up on the games. If people are just buying the consoles to mod, then they'll have a net loss.
This strategy implies that they're going for a monopoly, rather than profit.
Xbox...Elijah Wood...MTV...
It's the three things I despise the most.
Seriously, what demographic is Microsoft trying to reach? The people who know the least about good gaming? Oh, wait, I think I figured it out...
Wired did an article about Cohen in January.
Here's a link: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.01/bittorreI'd say 10-20 hours. That's long enough to have a good story and a certain amount of complexity, but it's also short enough that you can replay it several times without spending a year on it.
I know that when I play RPGs, I sometimes feel like I'm missing out. I spend 80 hours playing a warrior, which means that I'm missing out on playing a rogue, a priest, or a mage. I don't really want to spend 320 hours playing the same RPG, so I get to play every class. If the game is only 10-20 hours long, then I can spend about 60 hours and I'll get to experience the game from several different perspectives.
Plus, most really long games get repetitive after a while. Once you get about 15 hours into a game, you've discovered 95% of the game mechanics, so you're just going to repeat the same things for another several dozen hours.
I often don't like small games because they have no depth. If you take some of the Popcap games, like Bejeweled, you'll see that there isn't much complexity or strategy to them. Those types of games get very repetitive; your 50th hour will have the same gameplay as your 1st hour.
Once you get into competitive multiplayer games, however, things start to shift. 2-5 minute games can be fun, because you can play so many games in a row that you can try dozens of different strategies and situations. If you're losing, then the game will be over quickly, so you can start afresh. On the other hand, hour long games can be fun, because you can spend large amounts of time plotting methodically against your opponent, only for a game to come down to one huge climactic battle.
Blizzard is excellent at producing genre-defining games. Sure, EQ and UO came out earlier than WoW and invented many of the concepts that are used in modern MMORPGs. However, WoW refined the genre so much that I'd say that it is a genre-defining game, because it will probably define every single MMORPG that comes after it.
Final Fantasy Tactics Also, Starcraft for RTS and Civilization for Turn Based Strategy.
I would love to be able to play against Xbox2 players. They can't move well or aim well. They can't even see well unless they have an HDTV. They would just be free kills to up my score.
Wouldn't it be better to have a script constantly write and rewrite 1s and 0s randomly for as long as you have it running, than to just write 0s to it?
It still wouldn't work. Try bunnyhopping with a controller, regardless of the configuration. You have to bend your fingers into extremely irregular configurations, whereas with a PC, all you need to do is press a few keyboard buttons and move your mouse in a rythmic pattern.
Did anyone else think that World of Warcraft wasn't that great? Maybe I'm not the MMORPG type, but once you got to the mid-game (about lvl20-25+), you've got most of your abilities, so the gameplay mechanics won't change at all for the next several hundred hours that it will take until you reach lvl60 and can do raid instances. This wouldn't be a big deal (it isn't a big deal in many other games), but the combat system isn't that hard and doesn't have that much depth (compared to the non-multiplayer RPGs that I play). PvP is based upon your class (and race too, with WotF against Warlocks/Priests). If you face a certain class with a certain class, then you'll get schooled every time, unless there is a massive skill/level disparity (paladins > warriors, druids > warriors, rogues > warlocks, etc). Some items are so cheap (spider belt, the blacksmith trinket that stops fear) that they destroy another class' only way to stop certain classes. Character development is sparse, even compared to final fantasy games. Here are the only ways to customize your characters: 1.Race 2.Class 3.Items 4.Talents 5.Skills 1. This has little effect, unless you're an undead PvPer. 2. This makes a huge difference, but this is in almost every other RPG. 3. Your items depend almost entirely on the amount of time you spend playing the game, not on how you want to customize your character (unless you go for looks). Most characters have standard choices based upon talents and class. Warlocks go for stamina/intellect, almost always. Warriors go for stamina/strength/armor/DPS. Rogues go for agility/stamina/DPS. Druids go for stamina/intellect/spirit if you're restoration/balance, stamina/agility/strength if you're feral combat. You don't seem to have to make any choices for your equipment. One piece of equipment will always be better than another piece for a certain class/talent combination. 4. Here is the only way to customize your character other than class. It's well done, for the most part, although certain trees/skills are weak (druid feral, warlock demonology). 5. Your choice in skills only seems to determine your cash flow. A miner/skinner will always be richer than a miner/blacksmith, although their equipment will be similiar. The only exception seems to be a PvP engineer. Everything besides engineering stuff can be bought from another character at the AH (yes, there are some soulbound pieces of crafted equipment, but you can get comparable stuff at the AH), so there's no reason to pick anything other than moneymaking professions (except for engineering). One major thing (that may be endemic of MMORPGs) is that it takes 8 hours for you to level at about lvl30. 8 hours and you get 1 talent point and 1-2 pieces of new equipment. 16 hours gets you 2 talent points, 3-4 pieces of equipment, and upgraded skills. There's very little reward per hour spent playing. Other genres can get away with this (FPS games often have very little character advancement), but they have enough gameplay depth to keep you playing for long periods of time. The one thing that makes an RPG an RPG is character building. If it takes 8 hours to build your character up just slightly, then I'm not playing. It's got great sound and graphics, a good story line, an excellent UI customization system, tons of Blizzard polish, and high production values. The gameplay just isn't good enough, in my opinion (I have to say that Halo seems to suffer from the exact same problems, high production values, but mediocre gameplay, but that's OT). It's good for hardcore MMORPG gamers and casual players, but for a more general hardcore player, there are so many better games to play.
By using the tax credits for alternative energy, perhaps? I haven't seen anyone prove that you can get more fuel from growing corn (or whatever biodiesel source you want) than it takes to grow the corn. I don't even think thermal depolymerization does this (although it does make use of materials that would just be trash, which is why it is useful).
"Their case argues that EA's engineers "do not perform work that is original or creative," that they do not have management responsibilities and are seldom allowed to use their own judgement, according to extracts published by SiliconValley.com." I'd like to see EA try to prove in court that it does original or creative work.
As hard drives, optical discs, and memory cards keep on getting larger and cheaper, we'll eventually just start using some lossless, 10.2-channel format that is sold on a future CD-type format at Best Buy/Walmart or through iTunes/Napster or through streaming services for your portable music player/computer. Since all the formats will be equal in quality (at the maximum quality of the human ear), an open standard will eventually emerge. Then everyone will just use that and forget about CDs vs MP3s vs OGG vs iPod vs iRiver vs WMA vs FLAC vs etc.
I heard someone saying that they really aren't very good at FPS at all. They really don't deserve the title "FragDolls" unless they can go into the average CS/UT2003/BF1942/whatever server and rack up the kills.
They have taken an aggressive stance against botting. In fact, fishing was disabled in several areas until they were able to stop the bots. However, macros are most definately allowed, as they are built into the game. There is a macro button you can click on and create your own macros.
There are a few solutions. Make sure your maximum fps is set so that there aren't large variations in framerate. I believe the console command is "fps_max" or "max_fps." Set it to something reasonable, like 50. Try changing the field of view: sv_cheats 1 fov 90 Make sure your monitor refresh rate is as high as you can get it. Sometimes it will automatically force itself low again. Use the RefreshForce program to fix that (google for it). I like to play at least at 85hz.
Half-Life 2's graphics are excellent but not especially remarkable. The water looks the best I've ever seen in a game. Doom3 has a better engine, visually. However, Doom3 looks worse than Half-Life 2 because Valve appears to have a higher caliber of artists than iD does. Doom3 looks as good or worse than the screenshots. Half Life 2 looks better than its screenshots because screenshots don't give you the awesome physics engine. When you throw a grenade, things fly around realistically, looking amazing. Doom3 has some physics effects, but nothing even nearing the realism of HL2.
If you didn't like FPS games before, but want to try them again, Half Life 2 is the best choice. It's been hailed as the best singleplayer FPS ever released and I completely agree. I wouldn't worry too much about the box art. Both games are among the best ever released visually.
You do have a point. It has a high learning curve, and there are sites (http://www.nslearn.org/) out there to mitigate the problem. A revised version of the manual is almost out, as is a training map. Once you find a good server, the people there can be very helpful.
Regarding goal-oriented tasks in a FPS game, I think I've got a recommendation for you.
If you have the original Half-Life or bought Half-Life 2 Silver Edition, then check out the free mod Natural Selection:
http://www.naturalselection.com
Their site is down for today and maybe tomorrow, so here is a description:
It is a battle between Aliens and Marines, similiar to Starcraft (without the Protoss, though). The interesting thing about the gameplay is that you have an entire team based around incredible speed and melee attacks, versus a team based around teamwork and ranged attacks. Of course aliens have a few ranged attacks and require teamwork, but those don't play as large a role as they do for the marines. Aliens can move at about triple the speed of a normal character in a FPS game.
There are two game modes. The first, a simpler one meant for introducing people to the gameplay is called Combat. The marines start with their most basic weapons, and the aliens start as the most basic lifeform (kind of like a class, but lifeforms are incredibly different from each other, not just in statistics or weapon seleciton like classes usually are). As you and your teammates get kills, you get experience points that you can use to buy upgrades. For example, marines can upgrade the amount of armor they have or damage they do, they can get shotguns, grenade launchers, mines, jetpacks, motion tracking (a legal wallhack), automatic resupplies, etc. Aliens can get new abilities, celerity (improves your speed greatly), focus (doubles damage and halves your attack speed), redemption (if you are low on life, automatically teleports you to your base to heal), they can become a lerk (a support class that can fly and dispense clouds of gas to either deflect shots or poison enemies). The object of the game is to destroy a structure at each team's base.
The more involved game mode is called Classic (it was the original game mode). It involves RTS elements. Both teams start far away from each other on the map. The marines start with a command console. One marine can jump in the console and have a RTS-style overhead view of the map. He can drop Resource Towers (these give you resources that will allow you to build more stuff), armories (these will allow you to dispense weapons), siege turrets (these will destroy alien buildings, and even shoot through walls!), drop medpacks or ammo to marines in the field, etc. The aliens all start as skulks (small fast rat-like creatures that can run up walls and bite marines). The aliens can morph into gorges (these will allow you to place recourse nodes, offense chambers (attack turrets), movement chambers (these will restore energy-basically ammo-to all aliens near by and allow you to teleport to the farthest away hive), etc. They can also place hives (these will take a very long time to build, but will double your spawn rate, give you access to more upgrades and more abilities, and improve your armor). You can also change into one of 5 life forms like a fade (hit and run shock trooper that can move at incredible speed and dish out a ton of damage) or an onos (a huge rhinocerous creature that can take tremendous amount of damage, while trashing an enemy base).
It's not Massively Multiplayer (max 32 players, best with about 12-20), and it doesn't have vehicles, but it has everyone other element you wanted. It is very goal oriented, with a diverse set of equipment. It's got heavy fighting, lets you build bases (maybe not as big as fortresses, but it has mines, turrets, electrified buildings, teleportation gates and other goodies). It also has incredibly varied gameplay (you can command like an RTS, play as a marine in a very squad based environment, play as any of the 5 alien lifeforms, each with very different playstyle.
God, I sound like a fanboy.